New coaster at Canada's wonderland. Why?

Wednesday, September 7, 2011 8:40 PM
Timber-Rider's avatar

I was just reading about the new roller coaster that is going to be built at Canada's Wonderland. Why are they building another hyper-coaster when they already have one?
Are they trying to out-do La Ronde, and it's multiple inverted coasters? What's the point of having two?

It kind of makes me mad. Poor Michigan's Adventure can never catch a break, and they build two hyper coasters at Canada's wonderland, while their other parks continue to get the shaft. I guess it could be that people in Canada have more spending money, than coaster lovers in the US.

I would hope that it will be better than Behemoth, otherwise it seems a big waste of time and money to me.

+0
Wednesday, September 7, 2011 8:49 PM
LostKause's avatar

Two hypercoasters at a very busy park is better than one at a lower-attended park. When it makes sense to build a new coaster at some of the smaller parks, they will build one. Getting mad is silly.

No one is holding a gun to your head forcing you to ride CW's new coaster, right?

A park that doesn't make as much money is going to have less money invested into it.


+0
Wednesday, September 7, 2011 9:16 PM
Timber-Rider's avatar

LostKause said:
Two hypercoasters at a very busy park is better than one at a lower-attended park. When it makes sense to build a new coaster at some of the smaller parks, they will build one. Getting mad is silly.

No one is holding a gun to your head forcing you to ride CW's new coaster, right?

A park that doesn't make as much money is going to have less money invested into it.

Michigan's Adventure makes a but load of money. And, the cost to run the park is a fraction of a cent compared to Cedar Fairs bigger parks, with very little investment. If they would add better attractions to Michigan's Adventure it would only bring more visitors and more money.

But, MA isn't the only neglected park in the Cedar Fair chain. If they hadn't ruined Geauga Lake, they might have had a really great park on their hands. So, it's not just getting mad, its kind of sad too.

+0
Wednesday, September 7, 2011 9:20 PM
Raven-Phile's avatar

MA doesn't really seem all *that* neglected to me. I mean, they have what looks like an absolutely fantastic water park, several flat rides, and a couple of large coasters. It seems they have been adding little touches to the park in recent years and turning it from a football field with a couple of rides, to an actual exciting place that attracts families.

Just because they don't have a hyper or a hydraulic launcher, doesn't mean they're neglected. It's a completely different demographic.


R.I.P LeRoi Moore 9/7/61 - 8/19/2008
+0
Wednesday, September 7, 2011 10:19 PM
Tekwardo's avatar

How is MiA neglected again?


cebeavers.tumblr.com

Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.

+0
Wednesday, September 7, 2011 10:34 PM
Jeff's avatar

Timber-Rider said:
It kind of makes me mad. Poor Michigan's Adventure can never catch a break...

This is where your ceased to have any potential for discussion. You don't spend money you can't make back.


Jeff - Webmaster/Editor - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog - Twitter - Video

+0
Wednesday, September 7, 2011 10:43 PM
Vater's avatar

I almost quoted those exact sentences. Pretty much lost me at that point.

+0
Wednesday, September 7, 2011 10:54 PM

Businesses make investments that they believe will create the best return. Cedar Fair management has the info necessary to make those decisions. We don't.

+0
Wednesday, September 7, 2011 10:59 PM
ApolloAndy's avatar

Timber-Rider said:
Michigan's Adventure makes a but load of money. And, the cost to run the park is a fraction of a cent compared to Cedar Fairs bigger parks, with very little investment. If they would add better attractions to Michigan's Adventure it would only bring more visitors and more money.

Sadly those are all irrelevant. The only relevant question is "Will a new shiny ride make more money at CW or MiA?" Even with a relatively new hyper, the answer is still clearly CW if for no other reason than it serves a large metro area and has relatively little competition (amusement park-wise) for that metro area.


Hobbes: "What's the point of attaching a number to everything you do?"
Calvin: "If your numbers go up, it means you're having more fun."

+0
Wednesday, September 7, 2011 11:38 PM

I suspect CF could easily install another five marquee-level coasters in CW and they would all be great investments. That is, assuming they could find the room for them all.


My author website: mgrantroberts.com

+0
Wednesday, September 7, 2011 11:38 PM
James Whitmore's avatar

MiA needs a hotel.


jameswhitmore.net

+0
Thursday, September 8, 2011 12:51 AM
Raven-Phile's avatar

Are you kidding me? If MiA needed a hotel

You know what? I can't even bring myself to complete that sentence.


R.I.P LeRoi Moore 9/7/61 - 8/19/2008
+0
Thursday, September 8, 2011 1:00 AM
Vater's avatar

If there was a need for you to complete that sentence, it would already have been completed.

+0
Thursday, September 8, 2011 1:12 AM

I remember a time not long ago when people thought CW was getting the shaft. What a difference 2 big coasters can make. Now suddenly they're "spoiled" lol.

+0
Thursday, September 8, 2011 1:18 AM
Raven-Phile's avatar

Vater said:
If there was a need for you to complete that sentence, it would already have been completed.

Alright, internet tough guy.


R.I.P LeRoi Moore 9/7/61 - 8/19/2008
+0
Thursday, September 8, 2011 1:22 AM

While I don't think this new 300 footer should be going into CW, their is absolutely no way it should go into MIA. Be glad you got Thunderhawk. That was a huge capital investment for that park.


My favorite MJ tune: "Billie Jean" which I have been listening to alot now. RIP MJ.

+0
Thursday, September 8, 2011 3:13 AM
CoasterDemon's avatar

James Whitmore said:
MiA needs a hotel.

Or Maverick.


Billy
+0
Thursday, September 8, 2011 8:50 AM
67440Dodge's avatar

CoasterDemon said:
Or Maverick.

But not a hug?


Just another Mike..

+0
Thursday, September 8, 2011 8:59 AM

Is it not considered a giga coaster at 300ft instead of a hypercoaster? Just wondering...


+0
Thursday, September 8, 2011 9:04 AM
Pagoda Gift Shop's avatar

It is; a good point Bster. I really think it would be viewed totally differently if it was Intamin building the giga instead of B&M. Everyone says it is so similar to Behemoth, but really Intamin builds mainly for speed on their gigas as well.

+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...